stable.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
To: Christoffer Dall <cdall@linaro.org>
Cc: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: arm/arm64: Handle hva aging while destroying the vm
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 11:31:26 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170706093126.GJ5738@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170706074513.GC18106@cbox>

Hello,

On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 09:45:13AM +0200, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> Let's look at the callers to stage2_get_pmd, which is the only caller of
> stage2_get_pud, where the problem was observed:
> 
>   user_mem_abort
>    -> stage2_set_pmd_huge
>       -> stage2_get_pmd
>   
>   user_mem_abort
>    -> stage2_set_pte
>       -> stage2_get_pmd
> 
>   handle_access_fault
>    -> stage2_get_pmd
> 
> For the above three functions, pgd cannot ever be NULL, because this is
> running in the context of a VCPU thread, which means the reference on
> the VM fd must not reach zero, so no need to call that here.

Just a minor nitpick: the !pgd bypass is necessary before the KVM fd
technically reaches zero.

exit_mm->mmput->exit_mmap() will invoke the __mmu_notifier_release
even if the KVM fd isn't zero yet.

This is because the secondary MMU page faults must be shutdown before
freeing the guest RAM (nothing can call handle_mm_fault or any
get_user_pages after mm->mm_users == 0), regardless if
mmu_notifier_unregister hasn't been called yet (i.e. if the /dev/kvm
fd is still open).

Usually the fd is closed immediately after exit_mmap, as exit_files is
called shortly after exit_mm() but there's a common window where the
fd is still open but the !pgd check is already necessary (plus the fd
could in theory be passed to other processes).

> using the kvm->mmu_lock() and understanding that this only happens when
> mmu notifiers call into the KVM MMU code outside the context of the VM.

Agreed.

The other arches don't need any special check to serialize against
kvm_mmu_notifier_release, they're just looking up shadow pagetables
through spte rmap (and they'll find nothing if
kvm_mmu_notifier_release already run).

In theory it would make more sense to put the overhead in the slow
path by adding a mutex to the mmu_notifier struct and then using that
to solve the race between mmu_notifier_release and
mmu_notifier_unregister, and then to hlist_del_init to unhash the mmu
notifier and then to call synchronize_srcu, before calling ->release
while holding some mutex. However that's going to be marginally slower
for the other arches.

In practice I doubt this is measurable and getting away with one less
mutex in mmu notifier_release vs mmu_notifier_unregister sounds
simpler but comments welcome...

Thanks,
Andrea

  reply	other threads:[~2017-07-06  9:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-07-05  6:20 [PATCH v2] KVM: arm/arm64: Handle hva aging while destroying the vm Alexander Graf
2017-07-05  6:27 ` Christoffer Dall
2017-07-05  8:57 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2017-07-06  7:07   ` Alexander Graf
2017-07-06  7:45     ` Christoffer Dall
2017-07-06  9:31       ` Andrea Arcangeli [this message]
2017-07-06  9:43         ` Christoffer Dall
2017-07-06  9:34       ` Suzuki K Poulose
2017-07-06  9:42         ` Christoffer Dall
2017-07-14 16:40           ` Suzuki K Poulose
2017-07-16 19:56             ` Christoffer Dall
2017-07-17 13:03               ` Suzuki K Poulose
2017-07-17 14:45                 ` Christoffer Dall
2017-07-17 15:16                   ` Andrea Arcangeli
2017-07-17 18:23                     ` Christoffer Dall
2017-07-17 20:49                       ` Alexander Graf
2017-07-06  8:14   ` Christoffer Dall

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170706093126.GJ5738@redhat.com \
    --to=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com \
    --cc=agraf@suse.de \
    --cc=cdall@linaro.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).